Nikon Z7 Review

Nikon Z7 Review

The Nikon Z7 is the company's most well-rounded camera to date: it's as well spec'd and suited for video capture as it is for stills, and the quality of both is impressive. The Z7's design offers an experience that will be familiar to existing Nikon DSLR shooters, but in a smaller, lighter body, built around the all-new Nikon Z-mount.

This is Nikon's first full-frame mirrorless camera: a 4K-capable machine which features a variant of the D850's 46MP BSI CMOS sensor, but with the addition of on-sensor phase detection AF pixels and mechanical stabilization. From our testing the only area where the Z7 comes up a little short is autofocus reliability and usability - something at which Nikon's DSLRs have long excelled.

Key features:

45.7MP full-frame BSI-CMOS sensor with on-sensor phase detection

In-body 5-axis image stabilization (rated to 5EV)

493 PDAF points with 90% horizontal and vertical coverage of the frame

The Nikon Z7 is available now for a body-only price of $3400. It is also available kitted with the 24-70mm F4 S lens for $4000 (many retailers are offering additional kits with the 'F to Z adapter' for about $150 more).

What's new and how it compares

The Z7 isn't just a D850 without a mirror: we look at the key additions and what the Z7 offers.

Comments

I had the most extraordinary chat with a photographer friend.They got the Z7 in exchange for their D850.When I pointed out the problems, they said they are using the D500 for photography that requires accurate AF or tracking !! and Z7 for everything else !!I wasn't sure what everything else was, as they were also using the Fuji XT3 on the move !!

The S-AF of the Z7 is as accurate and reliable as my Sony A7rIII . Certainly from what I read C-AF is not as good though lets face it if C-AF and tracking are vital to what you shoot you would be better off with DSLR's

@James Stirling"C-AF is not as good though lets face it if C-AF and tracking are vital to what you shoot you would be better off with DSLR"I do not think so, no DSLR has a decent eye AF and near 100% frame AF tracking. Current best mirrorless easily match DLSRs AF, exception made for Nikon latest 3D tracking, but again Nikon has no eye AF and I prefer that over 3D tracking anyway.

@Stirling: ??? An A9 is easily able to compete with D5 and 1dxii. So your "lets face it if C-AF and tracking are vital to what you shoot you would be better off with DSLR's" is a bit weird. Even my A7riii and A7iii work great at weddings when tracking stuff, much better than all dslrs I used in the past (d5 is the exception).

Sorry guys my post has caused crossed wires . I was responding to HEWcanon and his post about a Nikon shooter and meant that they would be better served with the Nikon DSLR's .

@HFLMThe A9 after three firmware updates with enhancements to AF performance is indeed very good , the best mirrorless available. Tracking at a wedding is hardly a challenge compared to sport and wildlife. Despite the A9 performance it has not been the success I expected with very significant price drops . Maybe the Nikon's will improve their C-AF with firmware

Specialists cameras are never high volume products. Nikons d5 and Canons 1dxii aren't either (but they profit from a larger user base). Additionally, many wildlife/sports shooters are invested in expensive glass. Not something one trades lightly. Nevertheless, in Germany at least I know quite a few having switched to the A9, quite successful here.Although weddings don't press the AF as hard as sports events, all my previous dslrs had a hard time tracking the eye in dim light at f1.4 to f2 esp. with outer focus points. Low hit rate. It is interesting when talking to our fellow photographer friends or when giving workshops, this is something people complain about often. Easy with the A9. The wildlife guys at FM forum are very happy with the A9 focus capabilities, too. Quite a few are thinking of selling their 400/2.8 for the GM and A9.

I made no comment about the A9 capabilities just the major price drop . Since Feb it has dropped by £800 up till a couple of weeks ago there was an offer with free grip, free flash , free extended warranty . I have never seen any other Sony camera drop price so significantly in such a short period { I am a Sony user } . As you say a lot of photographers that need that level of performance are heavily invested in lenses

Actually, having tried the XT-3 on a few occasions (I even considered switching to it), I’d suggest the review score of 88% for it is hugely favourable. I first had a look at the XT-3 at my local retailer, they were holding a touch and try event for the Z7, and also had the Fuji there for the same purpose. I came away with the impression that as a fourth generation product, the XT-3 was some way behind the Z7 on AF, EVF and ergonomics. Before I get accused of not knowing how to set the AF up on the XT-3, the Fuji rep apparently did that for best performance.

I then went back a few weeks later to have another look at the XT-3 once it was in stock, and I was left feeling completely underwhelmed by it yet again. Also tried the XH-1 and the AF was as bad on that. For good measure, I tried a Sony FF mirrorless on the same day for comparison, and that was miles ahead of the Fuji cameras. I’ll stick with Nikon, the Fuji’s are vastly overrated.

If you want X sensor and wheels over wheels navigation you will prefer Fuji whatever the score is. If you do not like X sensor and want to shoot full frame, well, that is a different ballgame, and you can chose S or C or N as you like. Fuji cameras are for those with special preferences.

Main problem is that we are comparing 89% to a far superior D850 with same score .. However, compared to 89% and 90% given to Sony a7 III & 7R III it seems OK. Why is Fuji XT3 getting a far lower score as mature as it is? This makes the scores rather useless. I personally read the reviews and the conclusions and forget about the score, then try camera out for myself to decide to buy or not to buy .. in this case and after trying it twice .. it was not to buy.

Best thing is to forget the score .. it is not the main issue .. Main issue if you have D750 D850 D500 would you trade it in for Z7, keep it and add Z7, or keep your camera.

The biggest issues are class separation, image quality weight, and the moving target style scoring used. If these were spelled out continuously in the final scoring...

[89% Silver Award]-------------in------------ [2018 FF Mirrorless]

vs

[89% Silver Award]

...for all cameras, things might not have blown up as much. The test will be the EOS R's scoring, as its IQ is significantly lower than its competitors in the class, and IQ is supposed to make up a large percentage of the score.

I find the Fn buttons hard to use. Placement could be better. The front dial is hard to turn much because only a small amount of it is exposed. The back top dial isn't much better. Check the OLY OMD, Nikon. How could you do this?

I referenced only the well designed top twin dials on the OMD, how well they work, how good the placement of the Fn buttons are compared with a poorly designed Nikon.

To your Segway, there is no way you can shoot 80-840mm hand held with ANY FF system without spending 2X the money, carrying 2X the size weight & net more than a one stop improvement. To do better you have to carry a bazooka & spend as you do on a car.

If you go to a camera EXPO you will find its the DSLR that is dead. DSLR owners I know say they bought the last one. They are waiting for V2 Z & R, & replacement for flagship DSLRs.

They line up three deep in the mirrorless camera booths at Camera Expos while Canon fills their booth by giving away prints & Nikon reps have nobody to talk to. Z6 may help.

Next year OLY will bring a blizzard of new products & people who claim the system is dead will look foolish. You can't beat it for telephoto unless you have a Sherpa to carry the gear & a giant budget.

@MShotThat was a great story especially the part about the empty Canon and Nikon booths at Expos.Completely the opposite of what i have seen.But I digress, Olympus is dying, market share of 1 to 2% and now Panasonic shifting to FF is the death blow for the company.Start saving up for a sherpa.

No, you didn't see the opposite. And you don't read what Panasonic and OLY say or you don't want to know it. Panasonic is adding a format, not replacing one. They are expanding the business not replacing a format. They brought out a lot of new M43 products this year. Because they can't sell them? Because they are quitting the format?

The store manager tells me he saw a light switch thrown this year from which DSLR, to which mirrorless. There will always be a market for the crop sensor and if not I can't find anything better so I'm happy to use the gear I have. If the market dies I'll stock up with spares on the cheap.

I will never spend $20K for a couple of stops of light and carry a 12lb camera and lens when the images don't look any different when you shoot in the envelope.

The Nikon FM2 shutter release was locked unless you flipped the winding lever out, so it stuck out from the back of the camera... and gouged you in the forehead when you put your eye to the viewfinder. VVTF

I wish RIchard Butler would stop writing that scoring is heavily weighted towards image quality. It isn't. The highest current scoring camera in DPR, the D500, has a Crop Sensor and is a good, not great sensor. The rest of the camera was great - AF, ERGOS, Build, etc.

Thematic - Then why does DPR use this difficult to compare current, in production cameras to one another? The D500 isn't some out of production camera - it's current last time I checked.

To make my point easier for you to understand, I'm saying that Richard Butler & company are using this statement as cover in a BS review. Example - "We also love Sony’s Eye AF. These differences aren’t huge, but overall, the a7R III" . This is the dumbest statement ever. Eye AF is a tremendous advantage and DPR goes on to play it off as no big deal which is complete BS, just like Butlers Sensor argument (which are both Sony sensors anyways). Do you get now, Thematic??

The cover glass on the sensor is a different thickness than the D850, but the lenses should be optimized for that. Or the other way around (thickness optimized for lenses). Either way, adapted lenses look a bit softer on the Z 7 than natively on the D850 for this reason.

"If nobody buys the bodies because they're waiting for the lenses to arrive, then nobody will buy the lenses, because they'll be waiting forever for them to arrive."

We are not here to support Nikon with their R&D to get things right .. we are consumers .. it is the share holders and banks and funds who should or not support this till they get it right .. we buy products not support companies ..

Pros have already said it is not going to be their work horse or main camera for many reasons .. and they are the main consumers to Nikon .. Nikon has to make them happy for this to work .. and to buy lenses and bodies and accessories and service and support etc

Docno, Thanks for the tidbit, though there was no need to be snarky in your response, you know, because I was just stating a fact.

edit - Though I can see how one might think I was implying "anticlockwise" is an incorrect term -- that wasn't my intention at all. I was simply stating (according to a literal reading of my post) that I'd never heard that term and found it interesting.

Follow-up to my earlier post. .... Lets face it: the Z7 is a very good 1st cut, but it's not ready - yet - to hold the title of D850 replacement. It clearly needs more work to reach its apex, perhaps Z7 Mk II or Mk III. When AF reaches the D5, the banding is gone and low light AF improves, then we're in the money. But for now it is just an expensive consumer toy. AND, by the time those improvements arrive, we'll probably have a better native lens line up. ;-) .... 2021!

reply @ surlezi: Not to worry. The camera is going to be wildly successful. It is the future, make no mistake about it. Most of the people that will buy this camera don't even read this stuff. Only we dweebs read this stuff. ;-)

I think they can co-exist, as long as there is demand for DSLR while mirrorless lags behind .. If and when EVF, AF etc match DSLR, then who knows. The smaller size and instant effect pre-shooting may make it more usable. As it stands, seems like a few years away before we get to that point, at least with our favourite Nikons.

When you go to a camera expo you see the DSLR is already dead. Nobody goes to the Nikon or Canon booth. The others are three deep trying to get to a rep or the gear. Interest in buying a new DSLR is low. People who own them are waiting for Z and R lenses and V.2 when the bugs are discovered and fixed, features and capability are added.

Thematic : Not my format, but I'm a fan. I want to see them do well. As one of my friends who shot Nikon DSLRs since the D200 says, "They are a very conservative company. They wait for somebody else to take the risk. They jump in after its proven." True, and not a lot to admire. What did they do to advance digital photography? They had EVFs in compacts forever. They could have embraced this "new" technology early and used it in serious cameras but didn't. In the 2-horse race they protected their DSLR business until SONY threatened it. If it cost's them dearly they deserve it. What is it they re-invented? Everything about their mirrorless cameras is copied and they are WAY BEHIND what some of them can do. What specifically did they invent that is specific to a mirrorless camera? Their competitors are not standing in place. If Z8 and Z9 are four years out, they will still be 4 years behind.

It means pretty much what it says, lol. TRUE 9 fps, top of the line AF, Perfect ergonomics and build (the D850 is still small for my hands, and they arent that big)

And i would expect less viewfinder lag from a "mirrorless D850" as they called it. the D850 is amazing for wildlife/sports. the Z7 has an amazing sensor, but doesn't come close to the D850 (in terms of performance, sensors are identical from what ive seen online)

YES. I DO. VERY MUCH!. Doesnt that sound pretty amazing? a Mirrorless camera with DSLR body. why do i want that?

1. EVF 2. Possibility for blackout-less silent shutter3. Possibly better video AF?4. Would be physically thinner and also lighter than 1kg (D850+grip = 1.5kg which is very heavy for me to Hold firmly for 5-8 hours)5. IBIS (Probably will never happen in a Nikon DSLR.)

Like i mentioned before, TOP OF THE LINE AUTOFOCUS. this is the most important thing for me.

Also why isnt it reasonable to expect blackout free 45mp sensor? if the a9 can do it at 20 fps why cant a MILC with 45mp do it at 9? And also, i said its a possibility :). it will probably happen as technology advances.

D850 + D5100 + many Professional Nikon lenses, so not biased against Nikon.

89% rating is flawed. Bertrand Russel said "We should believe in what is real rather than what we wish was real".

A good start, in the right direction, useful for some uses. D850 is the best DSLR Nikon have ever made, not it's replacement. Is first attempt & long way to go. People should buy it because they like it, or good for their needs, certainly not because it is perfect or the replacement of everything else. Agree with most points about build, specs & Z mount. AF is critically bad & almost unusable for tracking. Missing 3D tracking. AF is the most important aspect of any camera, and this one lags behind and implementation leaves a lot to be desired.

Don't agree with 89% and will keep using my D850 with battery grip at 9fps, till they get mirrorless right.

Interesting debate, I can see why, based on other reviews on the internet, the score is coming in for critique. For me it’s a solid first edition with some wrinkles that will be ironed out with MK2, problem with such a high score though, what does the next camera get?

Second issue is ergonomics. Ergonomics should reflect the usability of a system, not just a part of that system. I’d therefore challenge the high score here because the system relies on adapted lenses at the moment. As a mk1 Sony A7R user this definitely effects the system ergonomics, you need different lens caps and what happens if you have the wrong lens on the adapter? Twice the effort. It’s a pain. Just like with firmware updates, DPR should reflect this is the score and update as more lenses are released.

It is obvious that the 89% rating is completely flawd .. Bertrand Russel once said we should beleive in what is real rather than what we wish was real ..

89% for Z7 .. is not for sure .. and if it didn't have the Nikon badge it would not have been given that rating

A good start and in the right direction and can be useful for some people for some uses I agree .. it is unrealistically expensive for its shortcoming for sure .. and it is not a D850 replacement or in any way similar .. D850 is the best DSLR Nikon have ever produced and still is .. Z7 is their first attempt at a mirrorless which has a long way to go

People are encouraged to buy it because they like it or they are curious or they like new gadgets or it fits with their needs .. but certainly not because it is perfect or the replacement of everything else ..

I am trying to see why in my opinion DPReview rating is flawed and subject to personal bias.To me Performance and Value are both very subjective. For instance for this camera in my opinion value is quite low, a similar problem as with the EOS R. Both cameras are overpriced and facing competent, often MORE competent competition for less money. The systems for sure hold value in the future, but not the current camera offering, not for the majority of the market at least.In my opinion also ergonomics and handling is quite subjective. Overall I feel that although the rating has the appearance of a reasonably neutral scheme it is actually quite subjective and in the more recent reviews cameras are not rated as much as they should in the market context, probably to avoid risky reactions, but landing in somewhat dull and trivial conclusions.

Dear Bob,I have been following DPR for about 15 years now and I enjoy reading and learning about new cameras development. That is way I worry about cameras reviews here. Is like seeing your favourite show disappointing you.It complements my passion for photography and photographic equipment, regardless of what I shoot. As a fact many reviews here inspired many of my past choices in camera gear.

Coming from an A7RIII I can understand your take on it. The Z7 is not a D850 replacement, for that we already have the D850. The Z7 does however have:Full magnesium alloy body/best built MILC on the marketBest weather sealingBest viewfinder(if you haven’t compared it to the Sony’s go to your local camera store and compare)Better ergonomics than most other mirrorlessHighest megapixel sensor

It does not have the best focusing for tracking, however, in my real world shooting it is faster than my D810. As far as dynamic range it is only 2nd to D850 and A7RIII.

So really a great camera, whether you think it deserves the score or not is not up to you but those that actually tested and shot it extensively, and they came away with the conclusion that it deserves an 89.

@NexLupusI do believe that the Z7 is a great camera indeed, all current cameras are great cameras. Scoring is supposed to be there for differentiation and indeed scoring is only relevant to the time in which a camera is reviewed. In my opinion in too many areas this camera is subpar at its price point. I would have no complains at 70% of the price.

I'm having trouble understanding a 89% score with a camera that has banding problems, bad low-light AF, as well as the 1 slot and the battery juice issue. Remember 89% is supposed to suggest that this camera is everything the D850 was when it came out. Except the D850 had none of those problems and was sold out for a year because it was the best camera ever made.

I think that perhaps DPReview should revisit the D850 and increase that score to 96%, because at the time it was just about everything under the sun done right.

The Z7 is a very good camera, and not much more was hoped for out of the gate into the Mirrorless FF realm for Nikon. But it's no D850. It does not warrant an 89%.

Good points but why is it always necessary to imply that the fact the camera was backordered had something to do with the quality of the camera? This is fan talk, and by that standard the Nikon DL is the greatest camera ever made because it's impossible to get.

AbrasiveReducer, Nikon always seems to pull this ridiculously small initial production trick, don't they? It has nothing to do with how many they are selling, and more to do with creating the fake hype that the camera is on high demand. psych 101.

It was a sensor shortage, because Nikon wanted something better than the A7R II, so they asked Sony to add 3MP to that sensor, which resulted in the usual yield issues of a new sensor. As petty as you can get, and Nikon paid for it.

The "what we like" column of the 'Conclusion', in my opinion, should mention that the one-axis "flip-out screen for high and low shots" is only useful for horizontal compositions, especially as both competing Canon and Panasonic provide solutions for vertical shots as well.

(Personally, I don't care about it "flipping around for vlogging" or not, but the percentage of my horizontal and vertical pictures is about 50:50).

@ttran88Isn't that great!!! Choices!!!If the Z cameras doesn't work for you or your style shooting, you have many other options in the Nikon line-up which are still class leading.Unfortunately other companies don't have those options.

@ttran88Yeah if you want class leading AF you have the D5, D500, D850, if you want crop you the D500, D7500, entry level, D5600, D3500, class leading Dynamic range and megapixels, D850, Z7, Best built mirrorless/Wether resistant Z7, and I would assume Z6But your right, not so great if you shoot with one of the other brands that have limited models.

@remrebus XQD support will be replaced by CFExpress by firmware update.CFExpress cards just not in production yet. So if you plan to produce camera with 4k video in 2018 and keep it for 2+ years on market you need to use XQD at least for now.

@NexLupus actually there is no 2000$ Fullframe camera in Nikon lineup.D750 dead already. If you buy it now, you will not be able to sell it yesterday. And no video in 2018.

I spoke to a good guy at the technical department of my Nikon dealer today and he accepted what I have been saying about the limitations of EVF. I have one as my second camera, an E-PL3 with the VF-4 I bought for a song as the camera became obsolete, but only for casual record photography, not my more ambitious stuff.

That EVF and others, some better now, are perfectly adequate in most circumstances. But being a photographer with 65 years experience I do not want to see an approximation of what the image might look like but the original scene, albeit accepting that it is going to be on a smaller scale. Shooting into strong sunlight as I prefer to do for the vast majority of my landscape shops, I do not believe any EVF can cope with that or ever will.

People forget that the eye has an enormous dynamic range, the optical part but plus the brain. I defy any technical electronics with software to match that ever. That disqualifies any mirrorless for me until I am proved wrong.

I was tempted to troll you hard as you are so sure of your position... but won't. Let me just say that I have almost as much experience as you and have used everything from a Zone VI through most medium formats to many Nikon SLRs both film and a few digital. I now have a Sony A7Rii and I love it... I expect that the new Sonys AND Nikon Z7 are better yet again. If you do ANY low-light photography or critical focus stuff... you will be amazed.Rent or borrow one... you won't be disappointed.

No question EVF is better for low light and perfectly OK in most people's usual daylight scenes. But, as you well know, I was not talking about that.

Which means I am not proven wrong at all. You are blatantly distorting my argument.

On top of that, what is wrong with having firm opinions that contrast with your own? Isn't trolling or accusing others of it either just trying to reintroduce some contemporary form of McCarrthyism or just being plain childish?

BTW I often have a look at the galleries if people commenting have them. I like to see if they are all talk. A few of your pictures are lovely and you do seem to have a way with the birds.

That is fair enough for people who like that and I know a lot of people do. However, as I made quite clear I prefer to see what I am taking, not what may result. That is because from experience I do not need it or want it.

People seem to get uppity when anyone takes a different point of view. I am not accusing you of that, but each to his own. There is room in this world for a multitude of opinions and it makes life more interesting and all embracing. As long as we can get along and do not hurt each other, but these days conforming to the common herds of lemmings is too much the way of the world.

Keepreal is right. Other opinions expressed in opposition are right too. The question is whether, through the viewfinder, you want to see something closer to the original scene, or closer to what the camera will capture. In the case of the EVF, you can see the original scene by looking directly at it, and then see an approximation of what the sensor will record when you look through the finder. In the case of the OVF, you see the original scene through the finder and an approximation of what the camera has recorded by looking at the rear screen. The difference is not really worthy of "finder wars". They represent somewhat different approaches, both of which will continue to be preferred by some.

Myself, I value the direct connection with the subject greatly and so prefer an OVF, but I value an EVF for reviewing images in bright light once captured. Neither method has it all.

It isn't just about the difference between a preference for the EVF experience or the OVF experience. Even if I preferred the experience looking through the OVF, I still can't stand the inconsistency of the experience switching back and forth between OVF and live view on a NIkon DSLR. The EVF/rear LCD experience is so much better. I also believe advancements in new features and performance will be with cameras that don't have a mirror. Finally, it doesn't really matter long term. If you want a DSLR then find the one you like and be happy because what you have is about as good as it is going to get. Just understand that by choosing OVFs you are likely giving up future features and improvements that won't be available to you.

If there is one thing that sets OVF users apart from the EVF is perhaps they are more proficient in setting the right exposure for a given scene as if they can mentally calculate and approximate the stop of light needed to achieve the shot they want. This takes a lot of practice, and patience. EVF is like giving you exposure information right out of the box and with information overlays such as zebras and histograms. It can help you judge if you are overexposing the highlights or crushing the blacks on a given scene before taking a shot.

"But being a photographer with 65 years experience I do not want to see an approximation of what the image might look like but the original scene, albeit accepting that it is going to be on a smaller scale. "

I don't understand this reasoning. The EVF image is truer to what the final captured image might look like. The OVF view IS the approximation. You bounce the light at the mirror and it goes thru a plastic, grainy focusing screen, then into more glass/plastic in the pentaprism. You are talking about shooting into 'strong sunlight' and that EVF cannot cope. This is farther from the truth. The EVF can immediately adjust for the strong sunlight depending on the metering pattern you use. Maybe your eyes can take looking into bright sunlight but most can't. And then in low lighting conditions, the EVF can see things that your eyes (and thus OVF) will never hope to see.

Agreed. EVFs are great and have their positive sides. But in for example lowlight they are borderline unusable compared to an OVF. An EVF is basically just a pretend viewfinder. A permanently attached loupe. They really should be able to give us both with a popup or like on the x-pro2.

LOL dynamic range of eyes... Blah blah blah...just open your eyes and watch your landscape directly and not through viewfinder. You can create frame with fingers in front of your face if you want. Viewfinder is just for composing.

"People forget that the eye has an enormous dynamic range, the optical part but plus the brain. I defy any technical electronics with software to match that ever."

Firstly, film photographers used to say the exact same thing about digital cameras. Secondly, it doesn't matter what kind of dynamic range your eye has, the limiting factor is still what the camera can capture. And I like my viewfinder to tell me where those limitations might appear in an image. That way I can make adjustments to try to mitigate or work within those limitations. That's what's so helpful about an EVF: it gives you more information about how the scene you are trying to capture will be captured by the camera.

You are wrong on several fronts, maybe due to habit but habit is not a fair criteria for something that requires adjusting your habits. The optical quality of the EVF on the Z7 is amazing and so finely detailed that most shooting parameters can be displayed in the EVF far better. I have used the Z7 for a week and find that it is easier to compose a shot without having to have modeling lights high. The AF is certainly better than my D800 which never was a problem either, but not as sure as the D850. Overall, I find the images at least as good as the D850 and better than the also very good D800. If someone has to pull shadows 6 stops to see banding they need to work on their exposure, no camera can cover up all the flaws in someone's technique.The build quality is the best on the market for Mirrorless. And the most important upgrade...the Z mount. That little kit lens, 24-70, wide open is the sharpest 24-70 on the market and corner fall off is nil. Can't wait for a 85 1.2

@Lobbamobba"Agreed. EVFs are great and have their positive sides. But in for example lowlight they are borderline unusable compared to an OVF."

I find the opposite to be true. OVFs become "borderline unusable" in low light because they are entirely dependent upon ambient light coming through the lens and bouncing up into the viewfinder to be usable, whereas EVFs portray the scene based on your exposure, and they can even be adjusted for brightness, making them more usable in low light than OVFs.

Thanks for the great review. Seems to be a great and very competent camera with really good image quality. Personally I don't think I would like to have 46 megapixel and those huge raw files, which can be really heavy to handle in post processing. So I'm looking forward to seeing a thorough review of the Nikon Z6.

I would agree with you. A 24Mp file size is about optimum for me too. I may want to shoot at 45Mp once in a while but I would say 95% of the time I would prefer a smaller file size. Even for advertising work, 24Mp is more than enough. That can easily produce a 24X36 inch poster. For travel photography which I am doing most of the time now, a 20Mp Micro4/3 image is more than enough. Most publications would only print less than A3 size. Thus, most of the time I just use my Lumix GX9 for convenience and get the job done without sacrificing quality.

Unless Nikon ceases production of the DSLR in the future, sorry, but I just don't see the point. Most who require what the D850 offers, have no real need for this new design. Now, should Nikon continue to reduce the size of this new camera, without compromising anything else, the sophisticated amature may start seeing this camera as a travel option. But the camera & its lenses need to get smaller. Otherwise, I see little need of buying this camera, as opposed to keeping a DSLR & its lenses. At least, I have never had an issue carrying around my DSLR-even when traveling. On the other hand, those who feel they must carry around every piece of camera eqipement they own every time they leave home, may surely dissagree.

I for one, will enjoy a Z6 when it comes out- I have 2 Nikon DSLR's, both crop sensor. This may be my first 35mm full frame camera, and think I'm really going to enjoy it as a casual walk around camera just as you have stated :)

One of my friend who uses Nikon just went for a 2 weeks tour of Turkey just shooting with her Nikon D750 and her 24-70mm f/2.8 lens. Eventhough she brought along her wide angle zoom and her 70-200mm f/2.8 zoom she didn't have to use it. It goes to prove that one really don't need a lot of equipment to shoot for a 2 weeks outing. Most of us carry around more than we need, thus, the crave for a smaller size body. Mirrorless cameras has its advantages but it does not make you a better photographer.

"I see little need of buying this camera, as opposed to keeping a DSLR & its lenses. At least, I have never had an issue carrying around my DSLR-even when traveling."

I used to feel the same way. Then I started using mirrorless. And now I no longer use my DSLR gear, especially for travel. The Z7 may not yet be on par with a D850 (at least not with this first attempt), but it's undeniable that their is a significant size and weight savings:

The D850 weighs 72% (420g) more, 23.5% taller, 16% thicker, 9% wider. The size and weight differences are pretty significant and noticeable, especially if your are carrying them around all day. And it's not just the bulk and weight that you're carrying around. For travel or street shooting, it's better to have a camera that has a smaller visual footprint. DSLRs don't do that very well. Mirrorless, particularly with the right lenses, does that better.

I have always found it odd so many focus their comments on the percentage, Gold, Silver, etc. awards. I suppose I could pick apart DPR for the flaws and imperfections in this system but I simply ignore it and focus on the content of the written review, and draw conclusions from that.

"Easy to use Wi-Fi + Bluetooth for sharing" - hmm, must have been a different Z7. There's nothing intuitive in the connection process and it was not working.

"USB charging" - a bad joke. No charging while shooting / recording, no charging from a powerpack, doors are fiddly, not easy to open while using a L-plate - I'm quicker with exchanging the battery.

After more than one month still no Capture One version. I wonder who's dozing. My expecations were not very high, but with all the trumpets and timpanis the played while starting their Z-line, it should have been much more amazing.

Curiosity. I like to use LiveView on D850, I don't like that it's so slow. I like to use my Nikon/Sigma/Tamron glass (and less so, to sell it and rebuy it from a different brand). I like to shoot silent and sometimes D850 is too heavy. Z7 and 24-70 weigh just a tiny bit more than D850 body only.

I was hoping Nikon would have improved connectivity. And I don't like to do the long process of micro adjustments for a new DSLR body. Frankly, I also thought getting back U1-U3 would make life a bit easier as the banks of the D8xx don't allow to come back to a "safe" starting position.

I don't like to read endless tests and was happy enough Nikon came out with a FF mirrorless after all those years. Side note: Nikon usually needs more time to come up with something, but contrary to Fujifilm's X-T3 they didn't need a firmware fix immediately after the camera got delivered ;)

I am not sure i understand your points but the D850 can shoot totally silent in live view with electronic shutter (both curtains). No sound at all. Also, the AF microadjustment is way easier and faster than any other DSLR.

@kpaddler: First, there's no combo of green buttons on the Z7 - one of the downsides, as well as there are no combo buttons to quickformat the card. If you're talking about D850: I don't want to reset the camera fully to standard settings. I want to set my standard settings, save them to one of the U positions and then use them. I'm as free toc hange the settinsg as I am with the banks, but I always can go back to the original set-up I chose before.

Like set up a B/W mode for landscape. But the more advanced stuff, like focus-stacking, can't be assigend to a U-position. I also have endless combosd - but also three safe harbors for specific jobs.

But changing a setting on D8xx always changes the bank. In NIkon system, I was coming from D7000 and used to U-settings. I missed them very much on D800, but I got used to the banks. Having both can be confusing at times.

@allari: D850's LiveView is far slower than Z7's. The AFMA adjustments of D850 are a progress against all predecessors, I wanted them for long time - but they are not very reliable. Or put it the other way: The AF still misses focus. If I do 3 different AFMAs with the same lens, target, light, tripod, I still get 3 different values.

At the end it was a recommendation, but I had to verify with LensAlign. Also: some lenses do need different AFMA for different distances. Sigma lenses can be adjusted to 4 different distances - but that takes 3 times longer.

My idea is not to reset a bank or camera to default settings, as I'd need to check each of them afterwards. Have you ever seen a menu tree of all the possible settings? ;) It would take days... ideally, it would also be possible to use an external app with a portable device, phone or tablet, to get quicker access or regroup settings the way they make more sense. It's rather time consuming to search a certain one.

As long as I don't know, which and which not, I'd have to crawl through the menu. Just checked the manual: In German, it's a "two-button-reset", and there's no chapter in the manual where Nikon explains which parameter will be reset. That means with my current state of knowledge the result is unpredictable and depends very much on what Nikon's engineers thought made the most sense to reset. I would need to compare the "old" settings with the ones after a two-button-reset. I really took some time (thanks for the information) to search in the manuals (there are two), but no success.

Also, if you get used to use combination of Shooting banks and custom Menu banks, you'll get enormous fast access to functions. That's why many people are not fan of limited U1, U2 profiles. But you have to invest time to learn the "bank" approach...

In the D810 manual I found a list of things affected by two-button-reset. I agree, once you learnt, the banks are more flexible - but U1/2/3 is much quicker to switch to, just a little turn of mode dial and you see which one is active.

I bet even more than the rabid brand loyalists the DPR staff wish every camera was perfect and easily deserved a 100% rating and Gold award so they didn't have to listen to all the whining. I guess even then the loyalists from other brands would be complaining that the camera under review was nowhere close to as good as *their* brand's camera that also got 100% and Gold.~

Indeed, Carol, you know why the pseudo photographers here are so boner about the score or award level. They want to proudly proclaim on camera comment boards that they are using a gold winning camera. They might even take pictures with it before starting to look for their next purchase.

I'm a Nikon fan and all my gear, except for 2 lenses, is Nikon/Nikkor. I would not have given the Z7 the score DPR have given it. It would have not been a Silver nor Gold nor any award. So many are going ga-ga for this camera just because it's Nikon's first FF mirrorless. They seem to overlook some of the specs and turn a blind eye to what's lacking.

The Fujifilm X-T3 scores an 88% and receives the Gold Award by DPR, and the Nikon Z7 scores an 89% and receives the Silver Award. Doesn't make sense to me. DPR should drop the Bronze, Silver and Gold Award labels and stick to the percentage scores.

Perhaps DPR should drop the percentage scores and the Award labels and force people to actually read the test? The test is very thorough and should be of help for those looking to make a buying decision.

Holy cow! A Battery life of only 330 shots? Is this a camera made by Sigma? For years people have complained about Sony cameras having short battery life and when reviewers pan the Sigma cameras one of the main things they complain about is their short battery life. Now Nikon makes a camera with similar battery life, but the camera gets a silver award. I guess all the other stuff makes up for that horrendous battery life, huh?

>Real life battery use is about 3x that number.Or even 100x, if you depress the shutter button at 10 FPS with remote control and leave it for a while. Or 0.001x, if you shoot videos below freezing temperature. It depends.

The CIPA rating is meant for comparing the cameras between each other, not for telling the customer, that he'll be able to make a certain amount of pictures. And yes, the CIPA rating in the 300s is too low for serious camera. For MFT or consumer-level APS-C it's fine.

@voronspbI would prefer for a rating to tell me in general range how many shots I will have, since that's what I'm interested in if I'm buying a camera. I'm not interested in infinitesimal comparisons with other cameras that I'm not interested in buying. That is only useful to a subset of camera fanboys that use it to argue on forums, not make buying decisions. Therefore, CIPA rating is broken with regards to testing mirrorless cameras.

That's just impossible. Battery life depends on how you use the camera. With mirrorless, that's more important than ever, since mirrorless uses a lot more power at any given time than DSLR.

A studio photographer, with their camera tethered to a computer, taking time to prep things in between each set of shots, may not even reach the CIPA rating. A sports/birding photographer, on the other hand, may get 10x the CIPA rating, since they'll be using the fastest continuous drive available.

What the CIPA test does is shoot cameras under a standardized testing routine. This ensures all cameras get even use, and battery life for one camera can generally be translated to the life another will get with the same kind of usage. So if you got 3000 shots on your 1000 shot rated DSLR, good chance you'll get 900 shots on your 300 shot rated mirrorless.

Also, some unsavory brands can cheat this system by reducing flash power output. I'm sure some know which company has done this recently.

@ lancetTo me the CIPA rating is fine. You can always note for yourself, how your usage scenario correlates with the rating, and which value is acceptable. Also, while upgrading the camera, you can predict to some degree the expected battery life of new model.No rating is ideal. One photographer loves 10-second bursts, another one does video work. But it gives a general idea about how eager for energy is this camera.

I don't know where you guys get the idea to multiply the cipa rating by some number to get the 'actual' battery life. The cipa has been more or less accurate within +/-20% in my shooting experience with mirrorless.

If we are comparing apples to apples Z7 CIPA is 330, A7RIII is 650 and A7RII is 290. So in general The Nikon is about 50% off the III Sony and only 10% better than the II Sony . For who is familiar with both Sonys will have a pretty good idea that the Z7 is barely passable. But then you can get a battery grip with no controls on it....

In a week I have shot 1354 frames and charged once after unboxing it and it has 14% left. The battery life, considering all the drain sources like EVF(which is class leading by the way) is quite acceptable and in fact the best of any of my other cameras

No, sorry, you are wrong, you have shot exactly 330 frames, then your Z7 shut off. Upon that in your sleepwalk you charged battery, shot another 330 frames, and again and again ... ... and after four sleepwalks and FIVE full charges you are at 1354 frames. Everything else is just your wishful thinking. :)

A camera like Sony RX100V with ~200 CIPA rating may shot some 2000 frames on single charge, if you put something heavy on shutter button. But that doesn't make its battery life good.

Besides, after getting the Sony A7III it took almost full battery charge to fully customize it to my taste, create custom menus, experiment with all the features, set up Wi-Fi connections and adjust my shooting style to the new camera. Only a few photos were made.

@spbStan1354 frames seams reasonably consistent with expectations and indeed barely acceptable in my opinion. That is not far off what an A7RII used to do and everyone screamed how poor that was. In my regular shoots I would have to expect to change battery several times which is quite inconvenient. I survived with the A7RII and I would even more with a Z7, but far from impressive and definitely on the negative side.

I guess the "well-rounded" claim is predicated on the fact that it is a pretty good option for video as well as stills. If you take video out of the equation it's definitely not as well-rounded as the D850. I have nothing against the Z7 BTW. It's a great camera but not convinced of its well-roundedness.

Just replied on this did some playing around and also posted on the open talk forum. Learn to use Nikon Picture Controls. The newer format pf3 Canon Picture Styles give you even more control over colour. You can make your OOC JPGs look more to your liking with not too much effort. And of course if you shoot RAW and use a preset in your favourite editor you can tweak your "colour science" to your heart's content. Sure you won't replicate another manufacturer's default style exactly, but you can do better than that anyway, and save yourself the purchase of a new camera system.

How do you figure that?Are they gonna ask for help from their sony pals that know about on-sensor C-AF??I had high hopes for the Z7 so I could get rid of any vestigial sony equipment but after the banding and the AF fiasco I am putting money in an a9 system to replace the d850 when silent action is required.

Despite its flaws the Nikon Z system could start to interest me in two or three years. Funnily, at this time, Nikon is in the position that Sony was in in 2013: Looking really promising, but quite a bit of 1st gen flaws, many of them connected to AF, and way too few native lenses. In 2013, I went with the Sony FE system despite these issues simply because it was the first mirrorless 35 mm with bodies comparable in size to an Oly E-M1 announced at the same time. But Nikon is a second mover. Still, I've always liked Nikon since my days with the F3 and the Z system could win my interest depending on how Nikon delivers on the lens front.

Lucky Nikon for having you to start "glancing at the Z" in a "couple of years". Why is that, that the entire galaxy must rotate around the black hole of vanities and fictional necessities of the always needy amateurs?

@Arcimboldo, If you are already heavily invested in Sony glass, this is going to be a tough choice for you. In the end, I thought Nikon is introducing a new mount that has long term potential so I went with Nikon instead. At some point, Sony will be upgrading their mount to be in line with Canon and Nikon so this is something to consider particularly when investing in Sony glass today.

@Bob Jameson I fully understand your standpoint – if I already had F-mount lenses I would also stay with Nikon and just get me an adapter. However, I cannot complain about the quality of my Sony lenses, despite the smaller mount opening. Be it as it will, I regularly lose only about 20% when selling lenses, which is not so bad for typically 3 or 4 years of usage. So changing the system probably would be unproblematic.

If you discard the fact that the A73 has sharper 4K, sharper and smoother 120FPS, cleaner ISO performance (damn that Z7 gets yellow and soft at higher ISOs) and that SLOG is flatter for grading then sure.

But to access Nikon's 10-bit and even N-Log, you NEED to purchase an external recorder. Sony's internal S-Log2 is fine. Going S-Log3 requires the same recorder. Also, if you know how to grade, S-Log2/3 and S-Gamut3 are excellent, as are most Logs out there. At that point, it's more about the sensor output quality than anything. You don't just stick with what the camera records and call it a day, just like a RAW image.

@Ironfilm"4K FF 10bit output!Nothing else on the planet which is sub $10K can do that!!"Canon EOS R does that too, and you can bet that all next generation FF mirrorless will do. I pretty short lived first.

Dpreview state that AF-C performance in low light is not reliable and causes a lot of hunting. I wonder what AF-S performance in low light is like. Can dpreview or someone who use the Z7 comment on this please?

Also what light levels does dpreview define as low light? Candle light, moon light or average living room light at night? Just trying to get a feeling which type of shots are really affected by the AF problems. Thanks!

Hi there, in my experience AF-S performance does slow down in low light and exhibits some hunting, but it's not too problematic for stationary subjects. As far as the hunting in AF-C, I know that our science editor Rishi had difficulty around 3EV or so, which is kind of a dimly and diffusely lit living room in the evening.

I find that with the S native zoom lens focus is much more sure in dim light, better than my D800 but not as good as the D850. using the 24-70 f/4 zoom, at f/4 the other settings for exposure averages 1 stop higher speed compared to using a 24-70 2.8G so the Z mount lenses are covering the sensor with more light. Using the FTZ adaptor slows down focus in very low light. I don't shoot sports or BIF so AF speed is not something that I even think about and almost always use single point in theater, event, wedding, environmental and studio so find the Z7 surpassing my needs since in since focus point it is plenty fast. Due to the lack of distortion in S lenses, tracking from the corners does not fall off. For the first time a mount and lens system that is as sharp corner to corner wide open is available in a Z7 and I assume Z6. It is pretty obvious how much better the kit small zoom is than and other 24-70 zooms out there

Ok, I’m confused. The Panasonic G9 gets silver because it (allegedly) wasn’t the leader in its class; it only caught up. It was released almost a year later than its competition.

I’d offer that the Fuji X-T3, released a year after the G9, was the first to challenge the G9, offering slightly better imagery and video, yet providing a lesser experience when it comes to customizing, ergonomics and grip, and no on board image stabilization. IE a year later, the Fiji, for roughly the same price as the G9, gives some better options, and lesser options than its competitors. But it receives gold.

Now, explain to me how the Z7 receives a silver 89% again? How does this match the Sony FFs of the last 2 years?

Actually, the AF-C seems to be so bad from the description of it that I actually wonder how the Z7 got the 89% in the first place if the Sony is so much better in this respect and got 90%. How can a better touch screen or marginally better finder compensate for not getting the shot? The percentage score is supposed to be more or less objective whereas the award is more about the reviewers felt about the camera.

This has been explained multiple times. The scores and medals are only relevant to the category the camera is tested in.

DPreview tell's you the category when they award the score. The z7 was tested as a 'semi pro FF camera'. Other cameras in that category include the Sony A7rIII, Nikon D850 and Canon 5D4. The Nikon's score and medal is only relevant to that category and thos cameras.

In other words a silver medal camera in one category might actually be better than a gold medal camera in an other category. This will always be the case comparing entry level cameras with semi-pro for example.

RubberDials: Well, oilcruzer has a point, since the Z7 is weak in comparison to its competitors in many areas. They're questioning the overall reasoning, i.e., if the G9 gets a silver for "just" matching the competition at a later date, how in blazes can the Z7 get the same award despite severely lagging behind Nikon's own competing product, the D850? And then there's the Sony A7RM3 or A99M2, too.

There is one feature no camera yet has but should, definitely at this price less. That is a full RAW histogram, rather than only the edited JPEG, drastically reduced from the image on the sensor. At the moment you can only get it post exposure on your PC with software like Fast Raw Viewer. I find this indispensable.

On one occasion I exposure bracketed extensively only to find afterwards with Fast Raw Viewer that one was sufficient and an HDR merge unnecessary. More typically, if I exposure bracket a few just to be sure one frame is spot on, the best one often is not the one where the JPEG looks the best in camera. That means your are not choosing the optimal exposure.

I wonder if the Camera even know the full RAW dynamic histogram before taking the picture.. but even if not, it would at least be nice to see it after the fact, so the OP is right here... would be a really nice feature

No need to rely upon tiny histograms, @DFPanno, just the % pixels of the total out of range at each end, which need to be shown. That is what I assess in Fast Raw Viewer. There is a histogram graph but I usually find that unnecessary to take much notice of.

Always I am keen that there is 0% overexposure of the highlights and while I try to do the same at the other end, it is amazing how well you can deal with under exposure because in real life you see solid black in some areas, so the same in the image often is perfectly satisfactory, especially when the areas so affected are broken up like, for example with a bush, in sunlight, where there is black between some of the leaves.

[That must be my longest sentence ever but it is well structured and perfectly understandable and BTW I do like Henry James.]

I just looked up and discovered what zebras are. What an utterly silly name when something like hatched would do. On Fast Raw Viewer there are options to turn that on the displayed image by using stand out colours like vivid purple and I think that is better as it is more clearly visible. I do agree though that would be perfectly fine instead of a histogram, as easier to see and assess, but I would like those numbers I referred to two comment entries earlier to be there too.

"I just looked up and discovered what zebras are. What an utterly silly name when something like hatched would do. On Fast Raw Viewer there are options to turn that on the displayed image by using stand out colours like vivid purple and I think that is better as it is more clearly visible."

First off "Zebras" is as old as digital video.

Second - no matter how wonderful the features of FRV are they can only inform you AFTER the shoot.

Another thing to consider - just a percentage of overexposed pixels is not useful information for me. It's not the same if 3% are in specular highlights in the background or on the nose or the forehead of the talent. I like zebras :)

If some Sony camera have RAW zebras, then I agree with @DFPannoand then I am I am wrong with my opening statement at the outset, there is one camera that has the feature I was after but that is mirrorless and I don't like EVFs. A pity others have not done something similar.

keepreal.. Wait.. You say on a MILC review you wish for RAW histogram realtime before you take the shot. DFPanno tells you about real-time zebras available on Sony, and then you say Sony is mirrorless and you don't like EVF's? But you want raw histograms? in your optical viewfinder? No wonder it hasn't been done before.

You better get over your fixation on OVF. OVF is dead technology. Sony guys have been saying it for a while, and now Nikon and Canon guys are also saying it now that they finally have released FF MILC cameras.

Mirrorless does have one definite advantage over DSLR. That is all that overlaid information instead of the scene unobscured. You can turn it off but it has a habit of overriding such wishes when it feels like it.

I'm used to Nikon cameras always having a slight edge over Canon when you compare IQ. But the noise quality of the Z7 is not even a grain better than EOS R. Moreover the DR (compared to EOS R sibling 5D4) is just marginally better at a +6EV push.And we're talking about basically 2 year old sensor tech here.

Nikon doesn't have the tech to make anything competitive. They're using Sony's sensor design, Sony's Hybrid AF, and Sony's IBIS. All lightly modified to fit their specs/needs. Previously, they used Aptina's sensors and OSPDAF in Nikon 1, and Renesas sensors in their highest end DSLRs, with a smattering of Toshiba sensors before Sony acquired them.

More about gear in this article

Sony and Nikon's flagship mirrorless cameras both offer impressive in-body image stabilization. According to our testing, you'll see a 2-stop advantage at the wide end and nearly a 5-stop advantage at the telephoto end on both cameras.

Nikon has announced a trio of new features for its Z-series mirrorless cameras are currently under development. They include Eye AF, Raw video output to an Atomos Ninja V and support for CFexpress cards. More details will be announced at a later date.

For the past few weeks, our readers have been voting on their favorite photographic gear released in the past year in a wide range of categories. Now that the first round of voting is over, it's time to pick the best overall product of 2018.

The Leica Q2 is a fixed-lens, full-frame camera sporting a new 47.3MP sensor and a sharp, stabilized 28mm F1.7 Summilux lens. It's styled like a traditional Leica M rangefinder and replaces the hugely popular original Leica Q (Typ 116), launched in 2015.

Fujifilm's GFX 50R takes the image quality from the existing 50S model and wraps it in a new body with new controls and a lower price of entry. Is that enough to tempt you to pick one up for yourself? Find out how the GFX 50R performs in our full review.

The Mavic Air hits the sweet spot for many drone users, combining compact size with high performance and good image quality. Find out what makes it so useful, and why it might just be the best travel-friendly drone on the market today.

The Fujifilm XF10 is a stylish, compact, well-priced pocket camera that will take great photographs. Unfortunately, the XF10's overall performance may be a let-down, including for those users coming from smartphone cameras.

Latest buying guides

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Montana judge Dana L. Christensen has ruled the Republican National Committee did not infringe upon the copyright of photographer Erika Peterman after they took a photo from a Democratic candidate's Facebook page without permission and altered it to use in a derogatory promotional mailer.

Leica recently announced the Q2, a digital rangefinder with a fixed 28mm F1.7 lens. It's a heck of a lot of fun to shoot with, but is it right for you? Based on our time with the camera, and its specifications, we've examined how well-suited it is for common photography use-cases.

Now that our Panasonic Lumix S1R has final firmware, we couldn't wait to get out shooting with it - and we also tried the high-res mode, which combines files to get 187 megapixel images. Because sometimes, 47 megapixels just isn't enough.

Drones can be useful tools in urban areas, where they're utilized for everything from news reporting to building inspections, but flying in these areas requires careful preparation. Here's what you need to know to do so safely.